The mediation of all these marginalized modes of address is happening in conditions that escape the traditional ways of the main public platform, which is male dominated [describe more what it is, how it looks like]. Practices have been developed in response to that. All of them have in common the localization, the small scale, the refuse of prohibition and specialization, the participation, the presence of the people, the liveness and temporariness. In this essay I will present examples of such practices.
These forms of collective voice affords the amplification and multiplication either with the aid of technology or embodied practices?.
The mediation of all these marginalized modes of address (see "Monstrosity...") is happening in conditions that escape the traditional ways of the main public platform, which is male and expert dominated. Practices have been developed in response to that. All of them have in common the localization, the small scale, the refuse of prohibition and specialization, the participation and presence of people, the liveliness and temporariness. In this essay I will present examples of such practices.
## The mediation of voice through multiplication
The urban space hosts several political activities like squatting, demonstrations, politics of culture and identity that are visible on the street and non dependent on massive media technologies. This brings the conversation to the Speaker's Corner, "the home of free speech, where anyone can get on their soapbox and make their voice heard" (Coomes, 2015). Anyone can be a speaker in a public street or square and be heard by the people surrounding her/him and passengers by. This practice was very crucial in the Occupy Movement <sup>[1](#myfootnote1)</sup>. Part of the occupy events would be public speeches often by philosophers, writers, academics, resistant figures(?) on the spot of the occupied space. The audience would may be very big and an amplifier was needed for the voice of the speaker to be heard to everyone. However, in the case of the Occupy Wall Street, amplified sound devices, like microphone and megaphone, were only allowed outside in the public spaces when a special permission from the municipality was given <sup>[1](#myfootnote2)</sup>. But "when the technologies above them are removed somehow, the foundational elements remain embedded and embodied in our cyborg bodies and brains" (Pages, 2011). The participants of #occupy became the 'human microphone', as is is called. This means that all together would repeat the words of the speaker for the benefit of those located in the rear. "Even given that many of the participants of #occupy are in full possession of smartphones, verbal address to the crowd from a singular source is still important" (Pages, 2011). This is an interesting fact of the public space of today. Even though many new technologies of networking, amplification and communication exist, the public space seems to exist in a more 'primitive', face to face communication and embodied expression for the ones that lack platforms of representation?.
These speeches may be recorded may not, may be streamed may not.
Saskia Sassen (2012, p.) observes that in the cities today a big mix of people coexist. The ones who lack power can make themselves present through face to face communication. According to her this condition reveals another type of politics and political actors, based on hybrid contexts of acting and outside of the formal system. Kanaveli (2012) says that something that is visible and can be heard is reality and can create power.
The urban space hosts several political activities like squatting, demonstrations, politics of culture and identity that are visible on the street and non dependent on massive media technologies. Such an example is the Speaker's Corner, "the home of free speech, where anyone can get on their soapbox and make their voice heard" (Coomes, 2015). Anyone becomes a speaker in a public street or square and be heard by the people surrounding her/him or passengers by. This was a very crucial element in the Occupy Movement <sup>[1](#myfootnote1)</sup>; part of the occupy events would be public speeches often by philosophers, writers, academics, resistant figures(?) on the spot of the occupied space. The audience would may be very big and thus an amplifier was needed for the voice of the speaker to be heard to everyone. However, in the case of the Occupy Wall Street, amplified sound devices, like microphone and megaphone, were only allowed outside in the public spaces when a special permission from the municipality was given <sup>[1](#myfootnote2)</sup>. But "when the technologies above them are removed somehow, the foundational elements remain embedded and embodied in our cyborg bodies and brains" (Pages, 2011). The participants of #occupy became the 'human microphone', as it is called. This means that all together would repeat the words of the speaker for the benefit of those located in the rear. "Even given that many of the participants of #occupy are in full possession of smartphones, verbal address to the crowd from a singular source is still important" (Pages, 2011). This is an interesting fact of the public space of today. Even though many new technologies of networking, amplification and communication exist, the public space seems to exist in a more 'primitive' and embodied expression for the ones that lack platforms of representation. Saskia Sassen (2012, p.) observes that in the cities today a big mix of people coexist. The ones who lack power can make themselves present through face to face communication. According to her this condition reveals another type of politics and political actors, based on hybrid contexts of acting and outside of the formal system. Kanaveli (2012) says that something that is visible and can be heard is reality and can create and give power.
From my point of view, the Occupy Movement revealed a lot about the relation of the media technology with the presence and resistance, emerged as an amplified process, in public. What I find interesting is that those people because of their multilayered relation to technology, like social media, are able to spread the words and make them viral in internet. Their speeches sometimes would be recorded or streamed, spread as fragments of a resistance. As it can be seen from the Youtube videos of the #occupy the crowd is using a lot of different media technologies, like their smartphones, to record or stream the words of the public speakers in Livestream platforms. This process was also a way to archive and make public bottom-up initiatives in public spaces in diverse networks. At the same time there is a temporariness in this action as platforms in internet are constantly changing or disappearing. So, the events and speeches are appearing in fragments of videos, transcriptions, conversations in forums. It is more like the users, protesters are leaving as many traces online as possible. The multilayered communication of the events is like an urgent and fast multiplication of them in different forms and spaces [more].
From my point of view, the Occupy Movement revealed a lot about the relation of the media technology with the presence and resistance, emerged as an amplified process, in public. What I find interesting is that those people because of their multilayered relation to technology are able to spread the words and make them viral in internet. This process is also a way to archive and make public bottom-up initiatives in public spaces. At the same time there is a temporarity in this action as platforms in internet are constantly changing or disappearing. So, the events and speeches are appearing in fragments of videos, transcriptions, conversations in forums. It is more like the users, protesters are leaving traces online as many as possible. As it can be seen from the Youtube videos of the Occupy Movements the crowd is using a lot of different media technologies, like their smartphones, to record or stream the words of the public speakers.
There are two ways of multiplication here. The one is through a unified collective voice and the other one through spreading the words as a spider net. The 'human microphone' resembles the first examples of collective voices in public, which is the 'ololyga', the female collective utterance (see 'Monstrosity'). Even though may not be a direct expression of resistance, it was an alternative mode of address that was suppressed and used only for specific occasions that were acceptable by the society at that time (see 'Monstrosity'). The second case reminds me of the very ancient practice of gossiping [example of gossip-based algorithms/ Gossip protocol/ peer-to-peer communication]. It has a negative connotation especially when connected with women [text of Federici]. However sometimes this is more an attempt to claim and exchange knowledge when there is no platform for them that practice it. The Internet and social media have the same baton effect and even though this is misused by mainstream political voices, it also serves the voiceless [examples and images].
*The female collective voice (thrinos)?*
gossiping -- baton effect
## The mediation of voice through amplification
According to Hanna Arendt the speech becomes possible with the existence of a group of people. Suffragettes' speech-making workshops was a way to provide women with tools “with which to take their concerns out into the public domain” (Rose Gibbs, 2016). Speech was a civilized way to respond to violence happening inside homes. Feminists focused on the voice because there is a uniqueness in it, that embodies the speaker when entering a dialogue. It is an approach that rejects the abstract and bodiless universal identity of one's person, that has been developed by the western thought. By that identity I mean one person is represented as a universal entity that shares the same characteristics and problems with all the people. So this person can be represented in a conversation concerning her/his body. But according to them each person is unique and carries personal and situated problems and principles. Even more, the voice through speech- that can take the form of songs passing from the one person to the other or the collective voice of protesting- links one another and at the same time keeps the individuality of the speaker. In contrast to mainstream political spheres the feminists, like anarchists, were looking for horizontal ways of communication were no voice was dominating over others. Listening everyone, even the most shy ones, is a basic element of this kind of practices.
<imgsrc="https://archive.ica.art/sites/default/files/media/images/1200IMG_0682.JPG"alt="Girl in a jacket"style="width:500px;">
In the examples of radio art and pirate radio activism the temporariness and site-specificity of these actions- of prohibition, sharing of knowledge and communicating through voice, amplification of voices- were tangled with the materiality and specificity of the medium....(hit and run actions)
@ -29,8 +24,7 @@ She brings the example of a project, called Talking Homes by John Brumit, that w
The second project that she talks about is The Public Broadcast Cart made by Ricardo Miranda Zuñiga, that is a portable home-made radio broadcasting the voice of the one driving the cart in several places. The voice of the participant becomes public on site through speakers and extends to radio frequencies and the Internet. The legality of the radio cart doesn’t concern the present public and the unusual object attracts even more their attention. Based on the open source and pirate radio spirit, this offering of access to the technology refuses the specialization and the prohibition of the airwaves. The parallel expanses of the voice and the uncensored speech in three different public spaces occupies at the same time the physical, on-line and electromagnetic realm. The DIY electronic media empowers the individual and collective voice.
*cars together playing the same frequency https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=28&v=GC8MIa98f-E, https://www.a-n.co.uk/events/temporary-local-broadcast/
max neuhaus people broadcasting different frequencies that compose a piece.*
@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ The public space in its broader sense (online, physical) is an open platform for
The text can take the form of radio show, song, theatre play, script, python script, structure of phonetic rules (ref: "Speech for the stage"), structure of pocketsphinx (tool for speech recognition), audio book (uploaded in XPPL:)), a feminist manifesto, like a guide. The purpose is to find other ways to talk about a topic in an academic context. It is my intention the structure of the text to talk also about the topic (ref: Amy's ref, DiY survival ).<br/>
Documenting my project:<br/>
What forms of presentation are appropriate for this practice? I want to build a way for that. My project proposes a range of possibilities and parallel processes (live action, happening at the same time or with delay). "since the arts are grounded in the material structure of society, artists must revolutionize the means by which their work is produced and distributed. One way this can be accomplished is for authors to be involved in publishing"(O'Rourke, pg.xiii). I will add parts of my project (texts, samples) in the thesis
